h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

MR - Can't wait

Courtesy

The old houses in our area (admittedly, the oldest dates back to the 1870's) have lovely wood for their interior work that looks wonderful simply stained--it literally glows. I guess the English used crappy wood in early Victorian construction that is best left painted. Frankly, I'm surprised. You (well, maybe it's just me) would think that in earlier times pride in craftsmanship was more common.

It's too bad MR and sea are so nice. Otherwise, we would *really* get the lowdown!

[Hati]

So this is a question that we were talking about in the BookNook and I thought it might be fun here.

Is science fact or theory, and do you believe there are non-human intelligences in the universe.

I believe science is theory, and I believe that there are definitely non-human intelligences in the universe, and they may even be on the earth just not in a form that we might recognize.

Thoughts?

Courtesy

I'm with you on science being theory, because frankly, every other week someone upsets the "facts" with more "facts" that are the opposite. So I'd go with theory....it works like this until proven otherwise.

As far as non-human intelligences, the odds of humans being alone in the universe are slim to none. How egocentric to think that in all that space, there are no species with intelligence as humans? We haven't even explored 1% of the universe, so how can we say there isn't anything, or anyone, out there.

As for being on earth, I always get that thought in the back of my head that if they're watching us, their probably shaking their heads in despair...we are such a young group of beings!

Really, there isn't any dirt...sea and I had a very nice lunch, we're thinking of doing it again, so there!

I have to believe that there is other inteligence out there, I just don't think that UFO's and crop circles are legitimate. Science *is* theory.

Red, ain't sea great?

Sea, ain't Red great?

I have had the honour of meeting them both (admittedly not at the same time)

Science? 'Theory' based on fact.

For example:

Fact - things fall towards the ground
'Theory' - there is a gravitational force in proportion to the mass of an object

And so on.

As our understanding of the facts and how they inter-relate increases, so the explanations move from hypothesis to theory to law.

Non-human intelligences - Who knows? But what the hell makes us think we can communicate with them when we can't even communicate with chimps (who definitely have linguistic abilities) or dolphins (who probably do).

Non-human life-forms - almost certainly. In fact Fred Hoyle suggested that DNA and RNA are themselves extra-terrestial.

Sorry to be so snippy - I have just spent an hour and a half changing the images but not the text on my U-space and the damn thing has been hidden pending moderation.

I guess I will have to go paint a few cupboards to sooth myself!



B

Your page is back now, Ben.

Science is a very broad term. For example, botany is a science and is largely concerned with observing, cataloging and identifying plants. These are facts. However, the scientific method is all about making hypotheses and testing them - i.e. figuring out how things work. This usually results in a theory, which can always be disproved by a single counter-example, but can never be proved, no mater how many supporting examples are found.

So, there are both scientific facts and scientific theories.

Here's a thought .....

What if all the plagues (bubonic, AIDS, etc) are really an alien life form doing battle with us? How do we know that virii (sp? plural for virus) are not an alien life form.

I agree that the communication barriers will be huge. If you have read Ender's Game (or read the review ..... quick plug), it posits an alien race with a hive mind that communicates using telepathy and didn't think our race was intelligent because we didn't respond.

Also, it's been proven that Aspen trees live in large integrated communities, might they be intelligent?

Courtesy

Well, Hoyle's hypothesis is that new viruses are space-borne. He doesn't credit them with malice though.

Can you tell us more Aspen trees living in communities?

B

PS - I noticed my page was back - I really have no idea why it disappeared!

*looks suspiciously at the tree outside the window*

I agree with GL, there are facts AND theories in science.

For example, the speed of light in a vacuum is 299 792 458 metres per second exactly. It has been this value since 1983 when everyone got fed up of endless experiments to refine the value. From this definition we derive the length of the metre (rather than the other way round). It's a scientific fact.

However, explaining what happens when a particle with mass approaches the speed of light is a theory. It is subject to experiment - scientific method.

Someone has been winding you up Amy. The meter was introduced in the 18th century in Revolutionary France as a reaction against nasty imperialist yards, feet and inches. Its length was based on an inaccurate estimate of the circumference of the globe. I cannot remember if it was based on the distance from the North Pole to Paris, or on the entire circumference. I didn't notice meters suddenly changing length in 1983 to accommodate the speed of light.

The French Revolutionaries also changed the names of the months and started driving on the right, which Napoleon then took to the rest of Europe. I think they introduced a decimal clock too, but I am not sure about that.

It is interesting what has stuck (meters, kilos, driving on the right) and what hasn't (the new names for the months).

In some ways it is surprising that the US still have feet and inches given how close politically you guys were to revolutionary France, and given that you took on driving on the right and other rebellious things.

B

I should have made myself clearer. We *now* define the length of the metre from the speed of light which means that we no longer have to rely on a measurement of the cirumference of the Earth or on a standard bar of platinum kept at constant temperature in Paris (although such bars still exist and are checked against the new way of defining the metre).

Dolphins can speak with each other - I once watched a very simple experiment on TV...

- two dolphins, two booths, two buttons in each booth
- one buttons ligths up, dolphins presses it, gets
- sometimes left button, sometimes right, but same sequence in both boots
- button lights turned off in one booth, but the dolphin still presses the same button as the dolphin in the booth where the buttons still light up

{[caer csd] *waves from sick bed and points to link*

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2178920.stm

Do they count? I was going to put dolphins too, but T got there first }

Birds? I once watched a documentary about a parrot - can't remember the name, but it's one of those big ones, that grow to be quite old - and experiments showed it had the intelligence of a 5-year-old human child...

[BB]

The crows definatly count, but I'm sure they are outdone by the tree rats, who are now ganging up on the local cats.

[LIL]
thinks humans are the aliens here

Oh my - has *that* conversation thread passes through the moderations of the past?

*suddenly feeling *very* old when reading postings she made after being a researcher for less than 2 months*

How little I knew about the place back then...:'-)

Huh? What I'm talking about? Oh - just the 'Formal Dinner - Invitation Only' thread from the Celery-Webjello Party: <./>F49946?thread=68145<./>

I'm with Ben--science is a theory based on facts. Besides, "science" is too broad a term to use in this discussion. Now, if you had used "evolution" or "relativity" then theory v. fact would make more sense.

Intelligence on other planets? Sure. Considering the infinite possibilities of the universe the liklihood that we humans are the only ones who can create, communicate, emphasize, and dream is unlikely.